Plea against engineering entrance exams dismissed by Delhi HC

The court granted the petitioner permission to withdraw the plea with the liberty to file the petition before appropriate forum under law.

By: Press Trust of India | New Delhi | Published:May 22, 2014 5:38 pm

The Delhi High Court has dismissed as withdrawn a PIL seeking to restrain the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) from conducting engineering entrance examinations on the basis of JEE (Main) and JEE (Advanced), 2014.
“The petition is dismissed as withdrawn,” a division bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice R S Endlaw said after the counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the case.

The court granted the petitioner permission to withdraw the plea with the liberty to file the petition before appropriate forum under law.
“How are you aggrieved by the whole matter?…no student has come forward and filed any petition in this regard,” the court said while dismissing the petition.

The PIL filed by Pushpanjali Das had sought a direction to the CBSE and 16 IITs to “re-conduct JEE (Main), 2014 within a week’s time and not on multiple days.”

It had also sought a direction that the CBSE and the IITs be not allowed to go ahead with the JEE as different sets of question papers for the exams, which would be held on different dates, will not provide equal opportunities to all students.  “The petition is directed against CBSE and 16 IITs for subjecting young deserving students to discrimination in the competitive examinations whereby an entrance examination in the same year is being conducted over multiple days with different set of questions.

“This results in questions of varying levels of difficulty on each day, as a result an average student may score more marks thereby denying a deserving student a chance of getting admission in prestigious premium Institutes of India,” the petition had said.According to the plea, the CBSE, since 2002, started independent engineering entrance examination known as AIEEE for admission to 30 NITs and 5 IIITs.

In the year 2012, Human Resources Development Minister Kapil Sibal proposed “One Nation, One Test” formula for the engineering entrance examination. However, later it was agreed that IITs be allowed to conduct their own examination separately but only for those first 1,50,000 students, who qualify AIEEE based on some cut-off marks, the petition had said.

The petition had alleged that the recent JEE (Main) 2014, held on different days in April 2014, the result of which was declared on May 3, has proved how “erratically, arbitrarily and discriminatory” manner it was conducted by CBSE.”

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App now

  1. S
    Shiv Kumar Bhat
    May 23, 2014 at 2:26 am
    Counsel for the peioner was forced to withdraw, else it would have caused prejudice for anyone else to file separately against the wrong system of CBSE and IIT. Court did not go in the merits of the case at all. This clearly shows concept of PIL exists on paper only, but not followed in practice. If anyone wants to file in individually capacity, as the Court woefully desired, please contact the counsel.
    Reply
    1. S
      SKB
      May 22, 2014 at 4:05 pm
      How can a common merit list be prepared out of online and offline exams held on separate days with separate sets of questions with varying degrees of difficulty ? The Authorities are playing with the career of students by their whimsical educational policies.There should be a single JEE Offline exam held across the country on a single day and the marks secured in XII Board should be considered only for minimum creteria instead of making a tail of marks secured in JEE and Board.
      Reply
      1. A
        arunoday parmar
        May 23, 2014 at 6:13 am
        if any one student files the pil is it possible to win the case????
        Reply
        1. A
          arunoday parmar
          May 23, 2014 at 6:11 am
          sir,i want to file in my own capacity.what i have to do????
          Reply